1997-10-23 - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a
Header Data
From: lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Message Hash: 6c2684ffec84ff729684b7046c99a5795b4cc1d1b93f3e8fd134f95d48d1acd1
Message ID: <slrn64ukqp.2ge.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
Reply To: <199710222033.VAA05775@server.test.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-23 13:42:02 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:42:02 +0800
Raw message
From: lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:42:02 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a
In-Reply-To: <199710222033.VAA05775@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <slrn64ukqp.2ge.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
* Adam Back wrote:
>One thing I never did get clear is: does pgp5.0 know how to reply to
>the CMR denoted extra recipients?
Yes. (AFAI read the source). It uses ALL these keys optional or required to
encrypt an answer to. I a keys is missing encryption fails.
>It also avoids key escrow for communication keys, and allows separate
>personal and company use storage keys, makes recommendations for
Included in the current Open PGP draft.
Thread
Return to October 1997
- Return to “Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>”
- Return to “amp@pobox.com”
- Return to “jmayorga@netscape.com (John Mayorga)”
- Return to “Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>”
- Return to “lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)”
- Return to “mark@unicorn.com”
Return to “Tim May <tcmay@got.net>”
- 1997-10-22 (Wed, 22 Oct 1997 18:10:30 +0800) - PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - mark@unicorn.com
- 1997-10-22 (Wed, 22 Oct 1997 19:57:44 +0800) - Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - amp@pobox.com
- 1997-10-22 (Wed, 22 Oct 1997 21:05:08 +0800) - shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 02:58:27 +0800) - Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 04:42:37 +0800) - Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-23 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 08:07:27 +0800) - Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - jmayorga@netscape.com (John Mayorga)
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 03:17:10 +0800) - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution) - Jon Callas <jon@pgp.com>
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 04:45:37 +0800) - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-23 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:42:02 +0800) - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a - lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 04:45:37 +0800) - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution) - Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
- 1997-10-22 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 04:25:05 +0800) - Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a possible solution - Tim May <tcmay@got.net>
- 1997-10-23 (Thu, 23 Oct 1997 21:41:58 +0800) - Re: shared keys, proxy encryption (was Re: PGP 5.5 CMR/GAK: a - lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de (Lutz Donnerhacke)